Re: [tdwg-tapir] {Definitely Spam?} Modification in the Inventoryresponse
I like the idea. It will make the inventory a little bit more "customizable" similar to the searches. Are there any objections or other preferred names for the new attribute?
Could be for example elementName, responseElement, responseName, tag, tagname, name, renamed. I think I quite like tag.
And I think it should be optional and default to the <value> tag if not supplied.
Markus
-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- Von: tdwg-tapir-bounces@lists.tdwg.org [mailto:tdwg-tapir-bounces@lists.tdwg.org] Im Auftrag von Javier privat Gesendet: Dienstag, 25. Oktober 2005 12:41 An: tdwg-tapir@lists.tdwg.org Betreff: [tdwg-tapir] {Definitely Spam?} Modification in the Inventoryresponse
Dear all,
Samy Gaiji, from IPGRI, sent us yesterday an email with comments about TAPIR. He consider the response format of the inventory operation inconvenient. For those not remembering an inventory operation looks like this:
Request: ------------ <?xml version='1.0' encoding='UTF-8'?> <request> <header /> <inventory count='true' start='0' limit='50' xmlns:dwc='http://digir.net/schema/conceptual/darwin/2003/1.0'> <concepts> <concept path='dwc:/Country' /> <concept path='dwc:/Genus' /> </concepts> </inventory> </request> ---- Response ------------- <?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?> <response> <header></header> <inventory> <record> <value>AUSTRALIA</value> <value>Calicium</Genus> </record> <summary start="0" totalReturned="50" totalMatched="73" next="50" /> </inventory> </response> --------------
He find hards to parse after that all concepts are named 'value' and having to trust on that the elements are returned in the same order as they were request. I don't know, for me this does not look like a big issue, but in any case here is a proposal that makes possible to assign names to the elements that are responded.
Request: ----------------------------------- <?xml version='1.0' encoding='UTF-8'?> <request> <header /> <inventory count='true' start='0' limit='50' xmlns:dwc='http://digir.net/schema/conceptual/darwin/2003/1.0'> <concepts> <concept path='dwc:/Country' elementName='Country' /> <concept path='dwc:/Genus' elementName='Genus' /> </concepts> </inventory> </request> ------------------------------- Response: ------------------------------- <?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?> <response> <header></header> <inventory> <record> <Country>AUSTRALIA</Country> <Genus>Calicium</Genus> </record> <summary start="0" totalReturned="50" totalMatched="73" next="50" /> </inventory> </response> ------------------------
You can find attached a modification of the latest protocol schema that includes this.
What are your thoughts on this?
Agreed.
Donald
--------------------------------------------------------------- Donald Hobern (dhobern@gbif.org) Programme Officer for Data Access and Database Interoperability Global Biodiversity Information Facility Secretariat Universitetsparken 15, DK-2100 Copenhagen, Denmark Tel: +45-35321483 Mobile: +45-28751483 Fax: +45-35321480 ---------------------------------------------------------------
-----Original Message----- From: tdwg-tapir-bounces@lists.tdwg.org [mailto:tdwg-tapir-bounces@lists.tdwg.org] On Behalf Of "Döring, Markus" Sent: 25 October 2005 14:33 To: Javier privat; tdwg-tapir@lists.tdwg.org Subject: Re: [tdwg-tapir] {Definitely Spam?} Modification in theInventoryresponse
I like the idea. It will make the inventory a little bit more "customizable" similar to the searches. Are there any objections or other preferred names for the new attribute?
Could be for example elementName, responseElement, responseName, tag, tagname, name, renamed. I think I quite like tag.
And I think it should be optional and default to the <value> tag if not supplied.
Markus
-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- Von: tdwg-tapir-bounces@lists.tdwg.org [mailto:tdwg-tapir-bounces@lists.tdwg.org] Im Auftrag von Javier privat Gesendet: Dienstag, 25. Oktober 2005 12:41 An: tdwg-tapir@lists.tdwg.org Betreff: [tdwg-tapir] {Definitely Spam?} Modification in the Inventoryresponse
Dear all,
Samy Gaiji, from IPGRI, sent us yesterday an email with comments about TAPIR. He consider the response format of the inventory operation inconvenient. For those not remembering an inventory operation looks like this:
Request: ------------ <?xml version='1.0' encoding='UTF-8'?> <request> <header /> <inventory count='true' start='0' limit='50' xmlns:dwc='http://digir.net/schema/conceptual/darwin/2003/1.0'> <concepts> <concept path='dwc:/Country' /> <concept path='dwc:/Genus' /> </concepts> </inventory> </request> ---- Response ------------- <?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?> <response> <header></header> <inventory> <record> <value>AUSTRALIA</value> <value>Calicium</Genus> </record> <summary start="0" totalReturned="50" totalMatched="73" next="50" /> </inventory> </response> --------------
He find hards to parse after that all concepts are named 'value' and having to trust on that the elements are returned in the same order as they were request. I don't know, for me this does not look like a big issue, but in any case here is a proposal that makes possible to assign names to the elements that are responded.
Request: ----------------------------------- <?xml version='1.0' encoding='UTF-8'?> <request> <header /> <inventory count='true' start='0' limit='50' xmlns:dwc='http://digir.net/schema/conceptual/darwin/2003/1.0'> <concepts> <concept path='dwc:/Country' elementName='Country' /> <concept path='dwc:/Genus' elementName='Genus' /> </concepts> </inventory> </request> ------------------------------- Response: ------------------------------- <?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?> <response> <header></header> <inventory> <record> <Country>AUSTRALIA</Country> <Genus>Calicium</Genus> </record> <summary start="0" totalReturned="50" totalMatched="73" next="50" /> </inventory> </response> ------------------------
You can find attached a modification of the latest protocol schema that includes this.
What are your thoughts on this?
_______________________________________________ tdwg-tapir mailing list tdwg-tapir@lists.tdwg.org http://lists.tdwg.org/mailman/listinfo/tdwg-tapir_lists.tdwg.org
Seems OK to me as well
Döring, Markus wrote:
I like the idea. It will make the inventory a little bit more "customizable" similar to the searches. Are there any objections or other preferred names for the new attribute?
Could be for example elementName, responseElement, responseName, tag, tagname, name, renamed. I think I quite like tag.
And I think it should be optional and default to the <value> tag if not supplied.
Markus
-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- Von: tdwg-tapir-bounces@lists.tdwg.org [mailto:tdwg-tapir-bounces@lists.tdwg.org] Im Auftrag von Javier privat Gesendet: Dienstag, 25. Oktober 2005 12:41 An: tdwg-tapir@lists.tdwg.org Betreff: [tdwg-tapir] {Definitely Spam?} Modification in the Inventoryresponse
Dear all,
Samy Gaiji, from IPGRI, sent us yesterday an email with comments about TAPIR. He consider the response format of the inventory operation inconvenient. For those not remembering an inventory operation looks like this:
Request:
<?xml version='1.0' encoding='UTF-8'?>
<request> <header /> <inventory count='true' start='0' limit='50' xmlns:dwc='http://digir.net/schema/conceptual/darwin/2003/1.0'> <concepts> <concept path='dwc:/Country' /> <concept path='dwc:/Genus' /> </concepts> </inventory> </request> ---- Response ------------- <?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?> <response> <header></header> <inventory> <record> <value>AUSTRALIA</value> <value>Calicium</Genus> </record> <summary start="0" totalReturned="50" totalMatched="73" next="50" /> </inventory> </response> --------------
He find hards to parse after that all concepts are named 'value' and having to trust on that the elements are returned in the same order as they were request. I don't know, for me this does not look like a big issue, but in any case here is a proposal that makes possible to assign names to the elements that are responded.
Request:
<?xml version='1.0' encoding='UTF-8'?>
<request> <header /> <inventory count='true' start='0' limit='50' xmlns:dwc='http://digir.net/schema/conceptual/darwin/2003/1.0'> <concepts> <concept path='dwc:/Country' elementName='Country' /> <concept path='dwc:/Genus' elementName='Genus' /> </concepts> </inventory> </request> ------------------------------- Response: ------------------------------- <?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?> <response> <header></header> <inventory> <record> <Country>AUSTRALIA</Country> <Genus>Calicium</Genus> </record> <summary start="0" totalReturned="50" totalMatched="73" next="50" /> </inventory> </response> ------------------------
You can find attached a modification of the latest protocol schema that includes this.
What are your thoughts on this?
tdwg-tapir mailing list tdwg-tapir@lists.tdwg.org http://lists.tdwg.org/mailman/listinfo/tdwg-tapir_lists.tdwg.org
Hi,
It makes validation less strict (by adding the xsd:any), but if the change really facilitates response parsing then I see no problem.
I think I quite like tag.
And I think it should be optional and default to the <value> tag if not supplied.
OK.
Regards, -- Renato
Hi all,
Before I forget, here are some problems that I have with the actual schema. I did not want to change things directly because I still consider Markus to be our editor ;)
-The search tag in the capabilities still requieres the "acceptUnknownOutputModels" attribute, this should be removed (Now this is indicated below in customOutputModels).
-The type of the datasourceName environmental variable is not correctly set.
-add, not & lessThanOrEquals seems to have the same problem under operators.
I think that's all for now...
Javi.
participants (5)
-
"Döring, Markus" -
Donald Hobern -
Javier de la Torre -
Renato De Giovanni -
Roger Hyam